Levitating Train from L.A. to Vegas

[AUTiger1 0]

Levitating train from L.A. to Las Vegas gets boost

Jun 6 05:54 PM US/Eastern

Top Ten Reasons to Get to Vegas Right Now

WASHINGTON (AP) - Plans for a levitating train from Las Vegas to Disneyland can move forward under a transportation bill signed by President Bush on Friday that frees up $45 million for the futuristic project.

Derided by critics as pie in the sky, the train would use magnetic levitation technology to carry passengers from Disneyland to Las Vegas in well under two hours, traveling at speeds of up to 300 mph. It would be the first MagLev system in the U.S.

The money is the largest cash infusion in the project's nearly 20-year history. It will pay for environmental studies for the first leg of the project.

The money had been delayed by a drafting error in Congress' 2005 highway bill, which was corrected along with some other changes by the legislation signed Friday by Bush. The delay had allowed a competing and cheaper diesel-electric plan to emerge as an alternative, but with the money now freed up supporters hope to move forward with the MagLev plan.

The train is meant to ease traffic on increasingly clogged Interstate 15, the main route for the millions of Southern Californians who make the 250-plus-mile drive to Las Vegas each year. There is no train on the route—Amtrak's Desert Wind between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., praised passage of the law, saying the MagLev project "will safely and efficiently move people between Southern California and Las Vegas."

Sky Train

Come'on, is this crap really necessary? Is there any one person on this board that thinks this is a necessity? $45 million is a small drop in the bucket compared to all the other junk we allow our elected officials to waste money on, but still, a levitating train? What is the approval rating of Congress again?

[bigsixfive 341]

That's something the tax base in LV and LA needs to pay for. There are definite benefits to such a system (much lower cost and time of travel between LA and LV), but they're the only ones reaping the benefits of it. I shouldn't have to pay for it.

[CCTAU 3,493]

I don't really have a problem with the train itself, but why not create the line on a route that could help the US economically. Run a train between DC and LA, stopping at many cities on the way. Then run one from Orlando to Maine, stopping at many cities on the way. At all points where the rain stops, the economy and the population would grow. You would have to carry products with this new train as well. So shipping across the US would become even more economical. The rail system in this country is extensive, but I think it has seen it's limit as far as speed is concerned.

[otterinbham 0]

Heck, why not let the casinos fund it? Why subsidize people's gambling addictions?

Now, Birmingham to Auburn would be a project that all Americans could get behind.

[AUTiger1 0]

Heck, why not let the casinos fund it? Why subsidize people's gambling addictions?

Now, Birmingham to Auburn would be a project that all Americans could get behind.

I like the way you are thinking Otter, but Huntsville to Auburn is the way to go!

Seriously, I agree with bigsixfive, that tax base should be the ones paying for it, not me.

CCTAU: I have always thought that if we had enough Nuclear Power Plants that we could convert most if not all of the rail system to electric, build new rails like you are mentioning and do a lot of our shipping this way. It would provide jobs, it's clean, will be cheaper in the long run and it would save a lot of wear and tear on the highways and Interstates. Plus people could travel from say Atlanta to New Orleans a lot faster than driving and it would be more economical than flying. One downfall would be it would put a lot of truckers out of work and most of the truckers would be making short runs.

[otterinbham 0]

All joking aside, I'd take a fast train over an airliner any day of the week if I were travelling anywhere within a 500-700 mile radius. Especially if the schedule were reliable and the train travelled even 200 mph.

After all, this is the typical airline nonsense

1) Arrive 1.5 hours before your flight. Check baggage. Have every orifice examined by the crack TSA employees. Wait one hour in the airport lounge working crossword puzzle.

2) If the plane leaves on time, travel 2-3 hours to your destination. If you're changing flights, add at least 45 minutes to this.

3) Disembark from the plane. Wait at luggage carousel.

4) Take shuttle bus from wherever the airport is--typically the most remote possible place in the metro area.

So, chances are, you've been travelling somewhere around 5-6 hours for a 2-3 hour flight. Meanwhile, a train dumps you out downtown. Walk out of the train station, hail a cab. How hard is that?

[AURaptor 1,137]

It will pay for environmental studies for the first leg of the project.

45 MILLION Dollars..... to pay for construction , surveying , enviromental studies for the first leg of the project!!!!

Amtrak's Desert Wind between Los Angeles and Las Vegas was canceled in 1997 because of low ridership.

[CCTAU 3,493]

Heck, why not let the casinos fund it? Why subsidize people's gambling addictions?

Now, Birmingham to Auburn would be a project that all Americans could get behind.

I like the way you are thinking Otter, but Huntsville to Auburn is the way to go!

Seriously, I agree with bigsixfive, that tax base should be the ones paying for it, not me.

CCTAU: I have always thought that if we had enough Nuclear Power Plants that we could convert most if not all of the rail system to electric, build new rails like you are mentioning and do a lot of our shipping this way. It would provide jobs, it's clean, will be cheaper in the long run and it would save a lot of wear and tear on the highways and Interstates. Plus people could travel from say Atlanta to New Orleans a lot faster than driving and it would be more economical than flying. One downfall would be it would put a lot of truckers out of work and most of the truckers would be making short runs.

That's an excellent idea. I think the truckers would be OK. There would just be more local and short runs. Meaning that drivers could actually be home for their families.

But as seen by the show of force by the left wing nut, Pelosi, anything dealing with getting energy from the environment will be met with a big screw you. Want a new nuclear plant, screw you. Want to drill for more oil, screw you. Want to build a new refinery, screw you. Unfortunately the ones she is screwing is all of us.